General Butterfield
Sergeant
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2017
- Location
- Philadelphia
1864 Campaigns: Grant's Approach vs Sherman's Approach, Which Do You Prefer?
On the Confederate side its often discussed the different approaches advocated by Joseph Johnston and Robert E. Lee and which was more effective. On the Union side, to a lesser extent, we have the same situation with Grant and Sherman. Despite being close partners, Grant and Sherman differed in their approach and employed different strategies for the 1864 Overland and Atlanta campaigns. Which approach do you prefer?
Grant's Approach:
-Focus on Lee's army not as much on Richmond, "Lee's army will be your objective point. Wherever Lee's army goes, you will go also."
-Aggressively bring enemy army to battle, employ attritional strategies
Criticisms:
- Less focus on maneuvering
- Heavy casualties, attacking entrenched positions
"There was but one way which was certain to give the AoP the advantage of choosing its battle ground, and that was the way adopted by General Sherman in his Atlanta Campaign, which was conducted contemporaneously with this campaign of Grant's in Virginia. That way was to flank the enemy out of position after position, until by some fortunate combination of circumstances he could be brought to bay in a place where our great superiority of numbers would tell."
Historian John Codman Ropes
"In every instance we have attacked the enemy in an entrenched position we have failed, except in the case of Hancock at Spotslvania, which was surprise discreditable to the enemy. So, likewise, whenever the enemy has attacked us in position, he has been repulsed. I think Grant has had his eyes opened, and is willing to admit that Virginia and Lee's army is not Tennessee and Bragg's army. "
June 5th, 1864 George Meade Papers
Sherman's Approach:
- Objective "enemy war resources", less focus on enemy army
- Tended to avoids heavy losses with flanking maneuvers, did conduct frontal assaults on notable occasions
Criticisms:
- Missed opportunities, let enemy army escape
- Can be overly Cautious
"Thomas and Sherman worked together during the campaign but they frequently disagreed over tactics and strategy. While Sherman preferred a campaign of limited engagements and maneuver, Thomas sought to deliver a knockout blow that would take the AoT out of action. On two occasions, at the beginning and the end of the campaign, Thomas suggested tactics that might have achieved this goal, but Sherman declined Thomas' suggestions. Sherman did not want to engage his forces in an all out battle."
George Thomas: Virginian for the Union by Christopher Einoif
"Despite his fierce, burning, war is hell reputation, Sherman was not a very aggressive general. Their are a number of occasions in the Atlanta campaign, Bentonville, where he does not manage his forces well and lets the enemy get away. He demonstrates a much greater preference for chess board war, maneuver war, than fighting."
Historian Ethan Rafuse
My thoughts on this came mainly from Hart's book on Sherman and Fuller's on Grant, among many other minor sources. Hope this makes for an interesting discussion.
On the Confederate side its often discussed the different approaches advocated by Joseph Johnston and Robert E. Lee and which was more effective. On the Union side, to a lesser extent, we have the same situation with Grant and Sherman. Despite being close partners, Grant and Sherman differed in their approach and employed different strategies for the 1864 Overland and Atlanta campaigns. Which approach do you prefer?
Grant's Approach:
-Focus on Lee's army not as much on Richmond, "Lee's army will be your objective point. Wherever Lee's army goes, you will go also."
-Aggressively bring enemy army to battle, employ attritional strategies
Criticisms:
- Less focus on maneuvering
- Heavy casualties, attacking entrenched positions
"There was but one way which was certain to give the AoP the advantage of choosing its battle ground, and that was the way adopted by General Sherman in his Atlanta Campaign, which was conducted contemporaneously with this campaign of Grant's in Virginia. That way was to flank the enemy out of position after position, until by some fortunate combination of circumstances he could be brought to bay in a place where our great superiority of numbers would tell."
Historian John Codman Ropes
"In every instance we have attacked the enemy in an entrenched position we have failed, except in the case of Hancock at Spotslvania, which was surprise discreditable to the enemy. So, likewise, whenever the enemy has attacked us in position, he has been repulsed. I think Grant has had his eyes opened, and is willing to admit that Virginia and Lee's army is not Tennessee and Bragg's army. "
June 5th, 1864 George Meade Papers
Sherman's Approach:
- Objective "enemy war resources", less focus on enemy army
- Tended to avoids heavy losses with flanking maneuvers, did conduct frontal assaults on notable occasions
Criticisms:
- Missed opportunities, let enemy army escape
- Can be overly Cautious
"Thomas and Sherman worked together during the campaign but they frequently disagreed over tactics and strategy. While Sherman preferred a campaign of limited engagements and maneuver, Thomas sought to deliver a knockout blow that would take the AoT out of action. On two occasions, at the beginning and the end of the campaign, Thomas suggested tactics that might have achieved this goal, but Sherman declined Thomas' suggestions. Sherman did not want to engage his forces in an all out battle."
George Thomas: Virginian for the Union by Christopher Einoif
"Despite his fierce, burning, war is hell reputation, Sherman was not a very aggressive general. Their are a number of occasions in the Atlanta campaign, Bentonville, where he does not manage his forces well and lets the enemy get away. He demonstrates a much greater preference for chess board war, maneuver war, than fighting."
Historian Ethan Rafuse
My thoughts on this came mainly from Hart's book on Sherman and Fuller's on Grant, among many other minor sources. Hope this makes for an interesting discussion.
Last edited: